A friday night to relax

Hanging out with some of my favourite people tonight. Sadly it's rare, but fantastic when it happens!

faith, politics, Bonhoeffer and Rudd

"Bonhoeffer's vision of Christianity and politics was for a just world delivered by social action, driven by personal faith. Bonhoeffer's tradition therefore acts still as an eloquent corrective to those who would seek today to traduce Christianity by turning it into the political handmaiden of the conservative political establishment."

"the Gospel is as much concerned with the decisions I make about my own life as it is with the way I act in society. It is therefore also concerned with how in turn I should act, and react, in relation to the state's power. This view derives from the simple principle that the Gospel which tells humankind that they must be born again is the same Gospel which says that at the time of the Great Judgement, Christians will be asked not how pious they have been but instead whether they helped to feed the hungry, clothe the naked and visit the lonely. In this respect, the Gospel is an exhortation to social action."

This is from an essay Kevin Rudd wrote in October last year, entitled Faith in Politics. Read more here.

Ha!

Some people are so predictable!

arguments

Lately, I’ve been reading a lot of “comment wars” on various blogs. I’ve noticed a few common arguments about why potentially offensive comments should be allowed. I find these arguments really troubling, so I thought I’d spend some time going through three of them.

If you post something controversial, then expect heated responses.

People like to say, “you should expect heated comments if you blog a controversial opinion”. However, I think the converse is equally true: if you hold on strongly to your opinions, then expect to find a lot of posts controversial.

Here’s a funny thing about blogging: very few people read because they actively want their minds to be changed on an issue. People - and I include myself in this – often read blogs to confirm their beliefs and find support for their point of view. For example, a right-leaning voter with a conservative stance on gender will find much support from a blog like Craig’s, while extreme lefties and feminists will grate with many of his posts (I’m sure Craig will take this as a compliment). Similarly, a mum who blogs about her children and home will attract readers who have the same priorities.

It’s in this context that we deal with the word “controversial”. The question is “controversial to who?” A mum who blogs that she would rather give her child formula milk than breastfeed is only controversial to people who strongly advocate breast-milk. Similarly, those who cannot tolerate a political stance other than their own will always read varying opinions as bigoted, heard-hearted, soft, misinformed, etc.

There is nothing wrong with having a strong opinion about something, if you accept there are people who will be equally passionate about the opposing view. Those who are able to hold on to their opinion, yet open their minds to understand other viewpoints, are the wiser for it.

If you post something in the public domain, then it’s fair game

The problem I have with this stance is that it’s not very Christ-like. Jesus had every right to declare himself as King and claim victory for himself, but he didn’t. He laid down His rights to serve us, ultimately by dying on the cross for our sins. As Christians, we want to imitate Christ. We are not about our “right” to attack someone on a public blog, but about looking out for other people’s needs.

The other problem with this stance is that it eliminates to concept of common grace and social kindness. It’s considered socially unacceptable to call people names to their face, attack them in conversation or make insulting inferences about their private life. Would it be okay to say “you’re a waste of time” to someone you barely know in conversation? Then why should it be any different online? Some people argue, “But it’s just lively debating. They shouldn’t have posted if they couldn’t take the heat”. For those people, I suggest adopting the rules of conversation when commenting.

If you delete/ignore my comments, you must be bigoted/facist/a nazi or dictator/pro-censorship….the list goes on

Out of all the arguments, I dislike this one the most. It reminds me of the manipulative friend who says, “You don’t do everything for me, so you mustn’t love me”, or the perverted relationship where the wife is expected to take beatings from her husband as a sign of her devotion to the marriage.

'24' in the 90's

This is kinda amusing - 24 with 90's technology.

Feva Christmas Cards

I remember these created a bit of controversy last year. The 2007 range are all online. You can scroll through them in a fancy slideshow window. What do you think about the 'anti-Santa' vibe?

mistaken identity

The other day, I was chatting with a colleague at work during a lunch function when she asked me offhandedly, “where are you from, if you don’t mind me asking?”

I’ve been asked this question a lot in the past, so I gave my usual answer: “I was born here, but my mother is from Indonesia and my father is Malaysian Chinese”.

She replied with a satisfied nod and smile.

“I thought so! I can always pick these things. I’ve been thinking for a while that you have very Thai features; I was sure you were from Thailand”.

This response left me bemused for a few reasons. Firstly, I can understand hearing Australia and thinking Austria, or interchanging Mongolia with Angola, but Thailand sounds absolutely nothing like Indonesia and Malaysia. Secondly, setting aside the pretention of presuming someone's race, I’m not too sure what having “Thai features” means exactly. For me, it brought flashbacks of being in Kindergarten and having a girl in my class run up to me, saying, “your nose is different from mine, it’s squashed!” and running off, screaming with laughter.

Anyway...

My colleague was so pleased with herself that for some reason - maybe because we were both drinking white wine and I was feeling particularly relaxed - I didn’t bother to correct her.

Now here’s my question. I’m leaving the magazine in three weeks, Thai origins undisputed. Do I fess up, potentially embarrassing her with an awkward conversation, or let the misconception continue until I leave?

After I told this story to Sam, he recalled a time when someone called him the wrong name. He couldn’t be bothered to correct him, so the situation became more and more awkward until he was forced to admit his name was "Sam", not "Steve".

Has this ever happened to you?

congratulations...

…to my husband Sam, who received his acceptance letter from Moore theological college today!

If you can, please pray for us:

*Thank God for his guidance, and pray that he will continue to make clear to us the path He wants us to walk
*Thank Him for his goodness in providing all of our needs – physically, financially, spiritually and relationally – and that we will continue to trust him in this area
*Pray that we will serve and rejoice in Him throughout Sam’s years at college, that we will grow to be more like His son Jesus
*Pray that Sam will be trained in the way God wants him to be, to prepare him for future work
*Pray for me too, as I work out what I want to do for the next few years. Also pray that I will cope well with changes college will bring to our lives (I’m not very good with change!)

Thanks!

The evolution of Labor?

This came from an opinion piece in the herald. What do you think?

Labor 1.0 was the Whitlam government; after emerging from 23 years in the wilderness in 1972 many of its members behaved like pigs at a trough and it was rejected overwhelmingly by the public in 1975. Labor 2.0 was the Hawke-Keating government, vastly more sophisticated and accomplished, but eventually undone by arrogance and the culture wars, as Paul Keating, Gareth Evans, Nick Bolkus and Robert Tickner led the charge of "racism" every time anyone dared to question its misguided policies on immigration or Aboriginal affairs. It took 10 years for Labor to recover.
Labor 3.0 is encapsulated by Rudd's refusal to contest the culture wars with Howard. The rhetorical tendencies of firebrands like Julia Gillard, Peter Garrett and the trade union ideologues have been conspicuously tempered or measured, or non-existent, since Rudd took charge. On Saturday night, we had the spectacle of Stephen Smith, a senior member of Rudd's shadow cabinet, complaining about "the worst excesses, the ugly face of unionism, which hasn't helped us at all". He was referring to Labor's relative failure in Western Australia.

Read the full piece here.

comfort food

There is nothing like it, especially when the sky is grey and its blustery outside.

There are only three rules with comfort food – it must be served in a bowl, it must be warm and mushy, and the eater must ignore the calories.

My favourites:

Pumpkin soup with crusty bread
Mashed potatoes
Meat pie with gravy
Hot chips with gravy
Hot chips with chicken salt
Apple crumble with ice-cream
Creamy risotto
Laksa

Tonight, we’re having meal-sized vol au vents, stuffed with pumpkin, chicken and mozzarella cheese.

politics

When the voting booths open tomorrow, I’m voting for Kevin Rudd.

The fact that I’m telling people “I’m voting for Rudd” as opposed to “I’m voting for Labor” is telling. Perhaps it’s the first time I feel like I can back both the party and the man.

There are many reasons why I’m voting this way, but I think it comes down to the fact that I believe we live in a society, not just an economy.

There’s been lots of talk about interest rate rises and fiscal management in this campaign. I’m glad that Rudd has erred on the side of caution as an “economic conservative” (as an aside – it seemed he came up with that line after going to some focus group, learning that what Australians feared most about the Labor party was economic mismanagement and being advised to make that his tag-line), I think the Liberals will do a better job of managing our economy.

But there is more to life than owning a home.

I’m voting for Labor because their values are closer to the kind of country I want to live in – fairness, protection, education, change, environmentalism, improved aboriginal welfare, technological development and most of all, compassion for others. I want to live in a country who does not define its sum-total as a healthy dollar and money in people’s pockets.

A part of me is scared that under a Labor government we will hit a recession hard, interest rates will soar and Sam and I will never be able to afford a house (though that wouldn’t be so different from now!).

But I’m still excited to see some change, starting tomorrow.

opinions

It’s been a slow week at work, so I’ve been reading lots of blog entries and articles to fill the long, seemingly endless afternoons.

There have been lots of strong opinions lately, many of them expressing disappointment, highlighting problems or venting anger concerning various issues.

That made me reflect on my own life. How much time do I spend criticising the bad things in life, compared to upholding what is good? I am always quick to pull things apart with my tongue. How eagerly do I take every opportunity to also build others up?

Bonnie and I have been reading Don Carson’s Call to Spiritual Reformation together – albeit very slowly. Last night, the Spirit struck me with a challenge to praise God openly when I am encouraged by fellow Christians.

But wouldn’t it be a great witness to be seeking the good generally in life? Not in a “freak-Christian-that smile is creepy” way, but with a warmth that reveals the hope and joy we have in Christ.

birds

Yesterday afternoon, I saw a flock of brown birds flying alongside my train.

As my carriage crawled across the Harbour Bridge, the birds soared and dipped over the murky water and fog. At first they flew in a perfectly pointed arch, but soon they broke into three lines - like pearls trailing across the sky. Even though they were separated, they seemed to know how to fly as one entity. It was like they knew God’s design for them and embraced it wholeheartedly.

I watched them with childish delight until they dipped behind the AMA building and faded into the clouds. It was the most beautiful thing I’d seen all day.

1 Corinthians 7 (part 1)

This is the first in a series of posts on 1 Corinthians chapter 7. Please read the passage and engage with the scriptures before posting your comments.

I’ve been following a discussion on Craig’s blog about men and singleness. There have been a stack of comments about singleness, gentle and quiet spirits, the ‘gift’ of singleness, the laziness of men, effeminate men and plenty of other “I’m post-modern and it’s fine if I just have an opinion as long as I hold it strongly” type comments.

I know that stepping into the gender debate is a very dangerous past-time, but I have some thoughts on the ‘gift’ of singleness, so I thought I would share. I’m going to try and keep my comments focussed on the text of the Bible (as much as I can) and I’d love it if that is where the discussion (at least on this blog) flows from. You might need a Bible or Biblegateway to follow these posts.

The idea of a ‘gift’ of singleness comes from 1 Corinthians 7:7, where Paul says, “I wish that all men were as I myself am. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another.” (ESV)

As far as I can tell, this is the only reference to a ‘gift’ of singleness in the whole of Scripture, so it’s important to recognise that we are not dealing with a big issue of doctrine here. Added to this scarcity of references, Paul makes a point of saying he is not giving a command to the Corinthians, but a concession (7:6).

But before we jump to verses 7 and 8, it’s important to deal with the context of these verses. Paul is writing about the issue of marriage and - it appears - answering various questions that the Corinthians have on this matter, kind of like question time after a sermon.

In some instances, we know what the questions are but with others, we aren’t told.

For example, we are told that Paul’s answer in verses 1-5 is on the topic of marriage, but we don’t know what the specific issue is. This makes a big difference as to how we understand Paul’s answer. For example, if the question from Corinth was, “I’m a 21 year old single guy – should I get married?” then Paul’s answer takes on one meaning. But if it was, “My wife just died – what should I do?” then Paul’s answer has different implications.

In 7:1-9, I don’t think that Paul is talking to those who have not yet been married (i.e. the 21 year olds).Rather, I think he is talking to those who have been married in the past and are now no longer married. I'll give my reasoning for this in the next post and hopefully it will help us understand the “gift of singleness” idea a bit more.

My Perfect Plea.

The other night, Soph and I spent some time reading over words to songs that we used to sing at our old churches. I have somehow managed to save lots of songsheet handouts (I guess that's how they did things in the days before data projectors!) and we had a great time reading the words and remembering how different songs went.

One song I particularly enjoyed remembering was "My Perfect Plea".

Before the throne of God above,
I have a strong and perfect plea:
A great high priest whose name is love,
Who ever lives and pleads for me.
My name is graven on his hands,
My name is written on his heart;
I know that while in heav'n he stands,
No tongue can bid me thence depart.

What song or hymn lyrics bring you great joy and comfort? Or brings you to tears?

Who do you agree with?

"Television's only 50-years-old and the studies that have been done on television about what kids are watching unequivocally state that at best they're not helpful, that the content is not helpful, and at worst it's positively damaging."

Noni Hazelhurst, ABC’s The World Today

"The public debate about what media does to children and what children do with media is still mired in emotive conclusions. There is a ton of good research that suggests that contemporary culture - just like soccer or tadpoling - can contribute to children's lives in a healthy way."

Catharine Lumby, Sydney Morning Herald

health matters

The other day, Sam said he wished the media would canvas all the policies put out by parties in the upcoming election.

Today I found this on the ABC Health and Wellbeing site. It’s a run-down of what the Labor and Liberal party have to offer on the issue of health. Some of you might find it helpful, or at least interesting.

It only covers the two parties, but skimming through it, I found it accurate, unbiased and up-to-date. Apparently health is the number one issue on voter’s minds, if Morgan polling is correct.

If only we had this for other topics, in particular the economy, education, Indigenous issues, the Iraq War and foreign policy.

books, movies but no TV

Thursday night is "So You Think You Can Dance" night. Sam and I love this show. It's fabulous times ten and makes me feel like taking hip hop classes (not classical or contemporary; they require too much skill. Contrary to the show's title, I don't actually think I can dance).

Tonight we gave it a miss to support a friend of ours, who is starting ministry training next year. It was great - especially for Sam - to see old friends and visit his former church.

We also managed to buy some second hand books for $1 each and borrow more DVDs from Matt and Kate.

Books include:

Pilgrim's Progress by John Bunyan
An exhaustive NIV concordance
An old Tyndale Galatians commentary
Expository thoughts on Matthew by JC Ryle
I Dared to Call Him Father - a biography of a high ranking muslim women who becomes a Christian

DVDs include:

Blood Diamond
2 Fast 2 Furious (Sam's choice)
Aladdin (I like the song - not A Whole New World, the Prince Ali song)
JFK
The Holiday (my choice)
Goodnight and Goodluck
Stranger than Fiction
Superman returns (neither of our choices, but felt I had to borrow this as I had a semi-crush on Superman as a teenager - anyone remember Dean Cain??)

Thanks Matt for the DVDs.
And thanks Kath for taping SYTYCD!

Facebook vid.

Lots of people have been linking to the acapella facebook song - which I don't think is all that funny, apart from the fact that it's acapella - that's always funny :) But this one is way clever-er! Check it out.

Comparing Party Responses

Yesterday afternoon I had a conversation with a good friend about the upcoming federal election. We were both wishing for some way that we could look at the different policies laid out by each party and compare them. We really want to vote on policy, rather than just buy up the slander that comes on Channel 10 during neighbours (where they are clearly aiming at the voters with the highest intellect!).
This site seems to have a go at it, but looks like at points its a bit out of date and possibly not balanced. Check it out anyway... (h/t Craig) It's a good idea, and it would be great to get a stack of analysts from different fields to weigh up the policies on the front page of a newspaper, so you can just read down the table and look at the different issues. Anyway, I'm sure I'll find a balanced approach to the election while we go to search for unicorns this morning....

Distant Sun

I'm having a relaxing Saturday so far - slept in, made scrambled eggs for breakfast and now listening to She Will Have Her Way - an album full of Australian female artists covering crowded House songs.

One of my favourite Crowded House songs, Distant Sun, is covered by Christian artist Brooke Fraser. I was really suprised to hear her totally cut out one of the lines from the song, the one that goes:

Like a Christian, fearing vengeance from above...

That strikes me as poor form. Fair enough if you don't agree with the line as a Christian (I'm asssuming this is why she cut the line, as there was no reason musically to do so), but why not choose another song to cover? It left this big, gaping hole in the song and made the lyrics less powerful.

I like Brooke Fraser's other songs, but this struck me as odd.

I wish I had a clothes dryer.

Possibly most of you are planning on leaving an "I want to look environmentally knowledgeable so I'm going to protest and tell you what you already know: clothes dryers aren't carbon neutral" comment at the end of this - and that (actually more the fact that we can't afford one and don't have space for one) is the reason we don't have one!

But after a rainy week like this one, I really would like a dryer. Our little flat doesn't have a balcony, so we can't dry clothes there. We don't have a garage, so not there either, and if you try to put anything on the line it rains every half hour. Any suggestions on how to get the washing done during a rainy week?

I love this story

I hope they fall in love and get married.

9km south of Tarcutta

In 2002, I went on a road trip with a few mates from church. We headed south, with a vague plan of going to the Australian open, and then driving the Great Ocean Road.

Before we left, we decided to have a plaque made as a bit of a laugh. It read: The Road Trip: 500km from Paul's (our church - I don't think we could fit in the "St"), then each of our names.

We nailed the plaque to a railway sleeper and concreted it into the ground, 9km south of Tarcutta, 150m before some power lines, 10 metres off the side of the Hume Highway.

I haven't thought about the plaque in years, that is until Roger and Fiona, some friends of ours, SMSed me this picture today:









Nice to see our legacy is still standing strong almost 6 years on!

too fat, too skinny

The worst thing a woman can do is be either too skinny or too fat, if gossip magazines are to be believed.

Since I got married, I put on a little bit of weight, which I attribute to less excercise and bigger portions of food (my "boy" servings" look exactly the same as my "girl" servings). My friend Bonnie says the increased girth post-marriage is also due to being happy - a consoling theory. However, it's hard not to care about weight gain, especially when our society is obsessed with the female body.

Maxim recently ran a poll on the unsexiest women in the world, naming Sarah Jessica Parker number one, followed by Amy Winehouse and Sandra Oh from Grey's Anatomy. It is bizarre to think that SJP’s worth in the media – despite her acting talent and success – is summed up by whether her body fits some magazine’s idea of sexiness. This kind of thinking filters down to young women and girls, who may grow up to think that the only way to be of any worth in this world is have a trim figure and a hot set of legs.

I know that my worth comes from Christ, that He loves me, died for me and has made me righteous is God’s eyes. Still, that doesn’t stop me from worrying if I’m putting on too much weight or from asking Sam, “do I look big in this dress?” I can write diatribes on the vanity of today’s women’s magazines, but still feel insecure about the way my jeans feel a lot tighter than they used to. Knowing that God does not look at my outward appearance is different from letting that shape the way I think about clothes, my weight, even chocolate.

Sometimes I feel like I'm fighting a never-ending battle with the pressure to look perfect, a battle with no final triumph, but tiny victories along the way. In that battle, this verse is of great encouragement to me:

Man looks at the outward appearance, but God looks at the heart.

Today is my final day at UTS

How quickly this has crept up!

It seems that only yesterday I was beginning a ministry apprenticeship; finding my way around the broadway campus of UTS in order to meet enrolling media students.
Now after almost 2 years of meeting students to read the Bible, talk about Jesus and encourage men and women in their Christian walk, I'm going in to uni for possibly the last time!
Today will be our final public meeting for Christians in the Media at "the loft" for 2007. Kinda surreal actually. I'm thankful for what God has taught me, and for what he has done in the lives of his people at UTS.

Reading level of blogs

Our is college undergrad. (h/t craig)

I have no idea how they work it out?

Prayer Event is on tonight

Today I plan to spend some time organising a section of tonight's Prayer Event. The theme of the night is 'Remember the Lord' - and we're going to be loosely basing the evening around Deuteronomy 6-8. My section will be spent praying in light of the future, especially for the return of Christ. Should be a good time!

Heroes and Villains.

veryone loves a good hero. Whether it's the 'I can do anything' hero like Jack Bauer, the 'quiet achiever' hero like Frodo Baggins or the hero with lots of courage and not much else such as the impetuous Harry Potter, our culture is full of stories about different types of heroes.

And with every story of a hero there must be a villain. Usually you can pick them by their name: Draco Malfoy, Lord Voldemort, Sauron - Lord of Mordor, Shredder, Keyser Söze or Darth Vader. He's the guy whose face you can't see, with a scary name you can't pronounce (in shows like 24, you never trust anyone whose name you can't pronounce) and of course - he's the one doing all the bad stuff. He's generally plotting the end of the world or just breaking lots of commandments.

Often we bring this manner of reading characters to the Bible. We read through the book of Genesis, marking out characters as hero or villain. As 'a good guy' or 'the big bad'. As we read, Noah, Abraham and Sarah get a big tick of good guy approval, while Cain, Pharaoh and Abimelech (notice the names...) are not to be trusted.

And when we read like this, it's very easy to assume that Noah, Abraham and Sarah must never have done anything wrong, because they're heroes, right? That's what western literature teaches us. Look for the good guys, and watch out for the bad guys.

But reading the Old Testament like this quickly becomes problematic. If the heroes or villains are obvious because of their actions, what are we to make of Noah "the hero" and his drunken nudie run in Genesis 9?

What are we to think about Sarah's conniving disobedience when she sets up an extra-marital affair for her husband with an olive skinned working girl in Genesis 16?

Or Abraham, the hero of faith, lying about his wife and pimping her out at age 90 to serve in Pharaoh's harem in Genesis 12?

Can these really be the 'good guys'? When Abraham pimps out his wife for the second time (this time to Abimelech in Genesis 20) it's beginning to look like Abimelech and the rest of the pagans are the good guys, while Abraham is the repeat offending 'big bad'. However,God gives Abraham Egyptian riches and slaves on his exit from Egypt (Gen 12:16ff)! How can God approve of Abraham's seemingly villainous behaviour? Isn't this the same God who wants husbands to lay down their lives for their wife?

Much of our problem lies in the fact that we presume that Abraham is a hero who does the right thing all the time.

But if we read the story of Abraham afresh, there are many moments where Abraham acts wickedly.

And if we read even more carefully, we notice that those Egyptian riches which we thought were a blessing from God are actually a curse. One of the slave girls whom Abraham takes from Egypt as part of his 'riches' turns out to be Hagar: the very girl Sarah sends to her husband's bed in Genesis 16, leading to further sin, pain and consequences. The 'blessing' turns out to be a curse with consequences.

In the Bible, there are no 'good guys', except Jesus. Every character that comes on to the scene fails to honour God in their actions. All fall short in some way or another. Everyone is a villain.

But that does not mean that humankind is without hope.

What we see through the grand narrative of Genesis is a God who is at work to fulfill his promises of blessing humankind despite themselves. And there are some wonderful moments where despite their wicked actions, God's people trust him. Even the tragic cousin of Abraham, Lot, who gets drunk and sleeps with his daughters is considered by the Apostle Peter to be a righteous man.

Because of his actions? Absolutely not. He is considered righteous on account of his faith, not on account of his behaviour.

Just like us.

Why we've been away.

If you haven't noticed, Soph and I have been away from the fountainside for the last month.

We decided to take a break for a few reasons.

1. We wanted to re-think the purpose of our blog.

2. Blogging can easily take up a lot of time, and it was kinda nice not feel any pressure to respond to comments or check up what was happening on our site.

3. The blog community can encourage argumentative rather than encouraging conversations: upsetting for Soph and tiresome for Sam.

4. We've both been busy. Soph's job is busier than ever of late, and there has been so much happening in our church family this last month.

Stay tuned: there's more to come from the fountainside.